Today's Creation Moment

Mar

31

How Many Smells Can You Smell?

Psalm 45:8

"All thy garments smell of myrrh, and aloes, and cassia, out of the ivory palaces, whereby they have made thee glad."

Until recently it was commonly thought that humans can smell approximately 10,000 different odors. But that's no longer thought to be true. So how many different odors can that nose in the middle of...

Bill Nye, the Pseudo-Science Guy

The likable, enthusiastic teacher once again injected humor into his television program as he went through another science experiment poking fun at himself by being a bit of a goof ball. In this way, “Bill Nye the Science Guy” endeared himself to parents and kids alike in the 1990s, mixing entertainment with science education on PBS.

But that was 20 years ago. In recent years, Bill Nye has become a crusader for evolution-only thought control in the USA, putting out video blogs ridiculing creationists. He urges parents to allow their kids to absorb the evolution message so that we can have enough engineers (?!) and “scientifically literate voters and taxpayers”. We have to remember, just because someone is a talented communicator who works well with kids does not make them trustworthy!

Bill Nye is a humanist (i.e. agnostic/atheist) “Fellow” of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry – a humanism support group founded by Paul Kurtz, the so-called “father of secular humanism”. In fact, Mr. Nye was given the title of “Humanist of the Year” in 2010 by the American Humanist Association. He is using his fame and reputation as an entertaining science instructor to pull people out of what the humanists say is the “pseudo-science of creationism”. Creation science and Intelligent Design have been specifically targeted by the humanists as “pseudo-sciences” which need to be abolished from public education – indeed, from all of society.

Let’s consider the term “pseudo-science” and what it really means. In 1 Timothy 6:20, the Bible uses the word “science” for “knowledge”, prefaced by a Greek word whose base is “pseudo”: “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called; which some professing have erred concerning the faith.”

The text makes it clear that pseudo-science, or false knowledge, is that which is in “opposition” to the knowledge of God. Opposition to faith in God is a goal of humanism. And so humanists and their allies have worked to gain preferred status for evolution over creation – to the point of excluding creation and even Intelligent Design from the public schools and universities, asserting that theirs is the true science and ours is pseudo-science. The Bible makes it clear, however, that they have it exactly backwards – evolution is a pseudo-science and creation is the truth. As the Bible says, “…the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made…” (Romans 1:20).

Secular humanists, who have tried to disguise the religious nature of humanism (a nature-based religion), have also tried to redefine “science” as that knowledge only which derives from nature-based assumptions (i.e., evolution). Therefore, they say, anything that challenges evolution is not science! But as pointed out above, science is simply “knowledge” – all knowledge. They thus make a fallacious argument about “science” when they claim evolution is science and creation science is not. Or that we should not be allowed to even challenge evolution, let alone to teach science from a creationist point of view. Yet, history tells us that most of the great scientists – among them, the founders of modern science – believed in the Judeo-Christian God and saw themselves as discovering principles established by the Creator.

In a recent video blog released by Mr. Nye, he says, among other things, “When you have a portion of the population that doesn’t believe in (evolution), it holds everybody back, really. … And I say to the grownups … don’t make your kids do it (believe in a creationist worldview) because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems. You know, in another couple of centuries that world view, I’m sure, will be, it just won’t exist. There’s no evidence for it.”

Well, Mr. Nye, your moniker should be “the Pseudo-Science Guy”. All science and engineering, life sciences included, can be done just fine without evolution! In fact, not wasting brain power on evolution would free it to do more true science and engineering. Thousands and thousands of scientists and engineers, both now and through history, can attest that evolution is irrelevant to their field.

What I can believe is when Mr. Nye says that progressives/humanists need our kids because, as he puts it, they need “voters”. Therefore, secular humanists believe young people need to be “educated” the right way – that is, to exclude the creation alternative. Mr. Nye is wrong about the future too – “Professing to be wise they became fools” (Romans 1:22). In the end, everybody will be creationists, and it will be evolution, not creation, that “just won’t exist”!

This blog entry was written by Creation Moments Board Chairman Mark Cadwallader.

The likable, enthusiastic teacher once again injected humor into his television program as he went through another science experiment poking fun at himself by being a bit of a goof ball. In this way, “Bill Nye the Science Guy” endeared himself to parents and kids alike in the 1990s, mixing entertainment with science education on PBS.

But that was 20 years ago. In recent years, Bill Nye has become a crusader for evolution-only thought control in the USA, putting out video blogs ridiculing creationists. He urges parents to allow their kids to absorb the evolution message so that we can have enough engineers (?!) and “scientifically literate voters and taxpayers”. We have to remember, just because someone is a talented communicator who works well with kids does not make them trustworthy!

Bill Nye is a humanist (i.e. agnostic/atheist) “Fellow” of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry – a humanism support group founded by Paul Kurtz, the so-called “father of secular humanism”. In fact, Mr. Nye was given the title of “Humanist of the Year” in 2010 by the American Humanist Association. He is using his fame and reputation as an entertaining science instructor to pull people out of what the humanists say is the “pseudo-science of creationism”. Creation science and Intelligent Design have been specifically targeted by the humanists as “pseudo-sciences” which need to be abolished from public education – indeed, from all of society.

Let’s consider the term “pseudo-science” and what it really means. In 1 Timothy 6:20, the Bible uses the word “science” for “knowledge”, prefaced by a Greek word whose base is “pseudo”: “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called; which some professing have erred concerning the faith.”

The text makes it clear that pseudo-science, or false knowledge, is that which is in “opposition” to the knowledge of God. Opposition to faith in God is a goal of humanism. And so humanists and their allies have worked to gain preferred status for evolution over creation – to the point of excluding creation and even Intelligent Design from the public schools and universities, asserting that theirs is the true science and ours is pseudo-science. The Bible makes it clear, however, that they have it exactly backwards – evolution is a pseudo-science and creation is the truth. As the Bible says, “…the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made…” (Romans 1:20).

Secular humanists, who have tried to disguise the religious nature of humanism (a nature-based religion), have also tried to redefine “science” as that knowledge only which derives from nature-based assumptions (i.e., evolution). Therefore, they say, anything that challenges evolution is not science! But as pointed out above, science is simply “knowledge” – all knowledge. They thus make a fallacious argument about “science” when they claim evolution is science and creation science is not. Or that we should not be allowed to even challenge evolution, let alone to teach science from a creationist point of view. Yet, history tells us that most of the great scientists – among them, the founders of modern science – believed in the Judeo-Christian God and saw themselves as discovering principles established by the Creator.

In a recent video blog released by Mr. Nye, he says, among other things, “When you have a portion of the population that doesn’t believe in (evolution), it holds everybody back, really. … And I say to the grownups … don’t make your kids do it (believe in a creationist worldview) because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems. You know, in another couple of centuries that world view, I’m sure, will be, it just won’t exist. There’s no evidence for it.”

Well, Mr. Nye, your moniker should be “the Pseudo-Science Guy”. All science and engineering, life sciences included, can be done just fine without evolution! In fact, not wasting brain power on evolution would free it to do more true science and engineering. Thousands and thousands of scientists and engineers, both now and through history, can attest that evolution is irrelevant to their field.

What I can believe is when Mr. Nye says that progressives/humanists need our kids because, as he puts it, they need “voters”. Therefore, secular humanists believe young people need to be “educated” the right way – that is, to exclude the creation alternative. Mr. Nye is wrong about the future too – “Professing to be wise they became fools” (Romans 1:22). In the end, everybody will be creationists, and it will be evolution, not creation, that “just won’t exist”!

This blog entry was written by Creation Moments Board Chairman Mark Cadwallader.

Comments

I can make a prediction and say that not a single person can because intelligent design is a completely religious belief and therefor can't be tested. Even if intelligent design were to make it into a scientific journal you know as well as I do that they'd only consider the most rational, logical alternative, and that can only be a physical, biological engineer not of this world. Take a moment to decipher what I just said... my sentence suggests Extraterrestrials... Aliens. That's what the scientific community would move towards if intelligent design were scientifically supported.

Besides, if God were scientifically proven that would invalidate faith altogether, which would defeat the purpose and isn't part of God's plan since he asks us to take religion on faith. People would have no choice but to believe and that's counter productive to the message of the bible. The creationist movement is actually anti-God, even anti-christian and actually does more to harm people's faith than it does to help it.

Submitted by E. Kelly (not verified) on Tue, 2012-10-30 16:02.

To Mr. Miller--

You are making several assumptions in your argument. First, you assume that because there may be a lack of peer-reviewed articles arguing for intelligent design in scientific articles, it is an invalid theory.
One hundred years ago, it was assumed that the universe was less than one million light-years across, and any theory that suggested otherwise was scoffed at.

Second, you stated that if something is a religious belief, it is not able to be tested, and therefore cannot be real. You are assuming that if anything cannot be proven scientifically, it cannot be 'real'. That argument will only work if all events in history can be perfectly reconstructed, repeated, and studied numerable times. I cannot perfectly reconstruct Waterloo, but I still know Napoleon was defeated. I can know this because of the historical-legal method, where I study documents from the time period describing the battle.

Third, scientists are human beings. They succumb to peer pressure. It is very difficult to publish your articles if others are critical of your work. So not all articles in all scientific journals consider the most rational, logical alternative, because some scientists do not like to be pronounced wrong. They do not like to be called wrong due to pride. It is a common fault.

Fourth, you assume that a physical engineer is the best explanation. I have a question: who made that guy? Physical matter is not eternal, so this maker cannot be eternal. He must have a cause.

Fifth, you assume that the scientific community would support aliens if intelligent design were supported. See the above two doubts.

Sixth, you assume God asks us to take him on faith alone. It is a common assumption, perhaps rooted in the old fear of being a doubting Thomas. If I recall correctly, Jesus is recorded as allowing Thomas to touch his nail and spear wounds. He did not ask him to believe that he was risen from the dead without evidence. If Jesus was God, and if God is morally perfect, then this quality in Him would be uniform.

Seventh, you assume that intelligent design movement harms people's faith more than it helps it.
I personally contradict this. If I could not have evidential grounds for belief, I would pronounce myself an atheist. I could not believe without reason. Otherwise, how would I know if what I believe is anything but imaginary?

Thank you for your input. It is appreciated.

Submitted by April (not verified) on Thu, 2012-11-01 12:40.

You can take your prediction back, as well as your complete faith in peer-review. A bunch of fools can get together and decide the emperor has new clothes, and it still isn't true.

Since your belief system is based on denying design, you cannot expect to be taken seriously by anyone who has eyes enough to look around and see. Design is everywhere. Work hard to deny it ... attribute it to unknown extraterrestrials instead of to the true and living God. But you're not fooling me. I'm well aware of who you are and how hard you have worked to deny God. Keep it up, and expect to be cut off from Him forever.

Submitted by April (not verified) on Thu, 2012-11-01 12:36.

You cannot fool me into thinking evolutionists truly believe their own theories, or they would not be so frantic about silencing anyone who disagrees. No, what's behind evolutionism is a desire to deny God. They do indeed come up with profane and vain babblings, but I know for a fact that they have to work very hard to believe them. (It takes considerable effort to deny the evidence of your eyes — such as kind reproducing after its kind — so that you can run after complete fiction.)

Evolutionism is more than a nature-based religion. It's a religious cult in which its members cannot admit there is such a thing as design or they will be cut off.

Mr. Nye is completely wrong when he says that evolution is the key to success in the sciences. The sciences have their basis in design and established principles that can be relied upon, not random chance. Evolutionism has retarded scientific progress considerably by trying to refute design to the point that you will see them correcting each other every time the "D" word is mentioned.

Design is everywhere. An educated individual knows God and acknowledges the Lord's hand. Only an ignorant, willful fool would deny it. And we don't need ignorant, willful fools in the sciences — or anywhere else, for that matter.

Submitted by Jeff Z (not verified) on Thu, 2013-01-10 08:48.

So what do people think happened to Mr. Nye? Was he never a credible scientist in the first place, or did something happen to set him on the wrong path? If the former, how did he keep us fooled during that time?

p.s. I appreciate being able to comment freely without jumping through a zillion hoops.

Submitted by Steven (not verified) on Fri, 2013-02-01 01:13.

Yes, design is everywhere in the universe! from the very large to the very small. The number Phi (1.618...) is found all over the human body, in the spiral of the nautilus shell, in the spiral arms of the galaxies, in the distances of the DNA double helix, in the cross section patterns of elephant tusks and frequencies of musical chords. Indeed there is a Designer!

Submitted by James Davis (not verified) on Tue, 2013-04-16 09:59.

Mr. Miller ---

SPONTANEOUS GENERATION. *Louis Pasteur* proved that spontaneous generation was impossible. Not so well known is that many of his methods of proof were improvements on work taken directly from the Roman Catholic priest *Lazzaro Spallanzani.*

STATISTICAL MECHANICS. The American Congregationalist *Josiah Willard Gibbs* and the French Catholic *Pierre Duhem* were two Christians whose work led to an understanding of the thermodynamics of and equilibrium in chemical systems.

STELLAR MAPPING. Many Christians were engaged in stellar mapping. Some made contributions of the highest calibre. Among them were *William and John Herschel,* *John Flamsteed* (founder of Greenwich Observatory), and the curate *Nevil Maskelyne* who became director of Greenwich.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC. Even the great Lutheran *Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz,* co-inventor of calculus, was unable to invent a workable symbolic logic although he took key steps in that direction. Success awaited the efforts of Irish- born *George Boole,* a man who held and practiced the Christian faith.

THERMODYNAMICS. *James Joule,* and *Lord Kelvin* are two famous names associated with the development of thermodynamics. Both were Christians, Kelvin more openly so.

TOPOLOGY. *Leonhard Euler,* famed as a mathematician and the butt of Voltaire's ridicule for his apologetics, created the science of topology with his study of the seven bridges puzzle.

TRANSFINITE MATHEMATICS. The Roman Catholic Czech theologian *Bernhard Bolzano* was one of the first to attempt a significant infinity theory. However, other Christian mathematicians such as *Weierstrass* and *Cauchy* also made contributions. It was, however, the brilliant mathematician and Protestant convert *Georg Cantor* who finally set the subject on a scientific basis. His work was embraced by the Jesuits.

VACCINATION. The most famous champion of vaccination was a Christian doctor, *Edward Jenner,* who did his work against fierce opposition and in the teeth of threats against himself. In effect he wiped out smallpox from among the diseases that terrify mankind. He died from a cold caught carrying firewood to an impoverished woman.

VACUUM. In the face of furious contradiction, *John Philoponus,* a Christian philosopher of the 6th century, CLAIMED that vacuum existed between the stars. This notion was derived from his creationist beliefs, and was directly contrary to Aristotalian teaching. This has since been confirmed. *Blaise Pascal* of Jansenist leanings, finally proved the possibility of vacuum in the 1600s. *Robert Boyle* developed a vacuum pump in conjunction with Robert Hooke and systematically showed the effects of vacuum and the role of air. Boyle's Law of Gases, found in chemistry texts, was one result.

WAVE THEORY OF LIGHT. *Thomas Young,* a Quaker, was the first to perform a double slit experiment and to show that light acted as a wave. The French Protestant *Augustin-Jean Fresnel* confirmed and mathematized Young's findings.

Ok to "PROVE" your point..... a designer.
"Compton, Christian Humanist", Raymond J. Seeger, in The Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, 37 (March 1985): 54-55 (<a href="http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1985/JASA3-85Seeger2.html;" title="http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1985/JASA3-85Seeger2.html;">http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1985/JASA3-85Seeger2.html;</a> viewed 26 September 2005):
and lets not forget this one:
<a href="http://www.adherents.com/people/pt/Charles_Hard_Townes.html" title="http://www.adherents.com/people/pt/Charles_Hard_Townes.html">http://www.adherents.com/people/pt/Charles_Hard_Townes.html</a>
Charles H. Townes, wrote of the parallels between religion and science in IBM's Think magazine in 1966.

I'm just saying.

James.

Submitted by K. Rob (not verified) on Sun, 2013-05-12 05:55.

I find this blog fascinating to read, I really do. I am a passionate and critical scientist in heart and soul, and I would classify myself as very open-minded. I have no idea how the universe was created, whether through a creator or something else, and I am not saying you are wrong in that respect, there is no evidence saying you are wrong.

I take offence when you repeatedly refer to evolutionists as "ignorant uneducated fools" or the like, or suggesting we "can't truly believe our theories if we defend them so much." I am educated and I also like to think I am not a fool, and I do truly believe in evolution.

I believe that creationism and evolution can co-exist, and frankly to argue otherwise would be close-minded. An example of this:

I know a reverend, she is a devout christian and an amazing woman. She believes 100% that god created the universe, but she is a biology teacher, and she believes and teaches evolution. Cannot God have created the Universe and then started the evolutionary ball rolling? could he not be the one responsible for evolution?

By being so completely vehement in your dismantling of evolution, you are almost appearing more close-minded and less credible.

Some food for thought.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2013-06-04 09:11.

Genesis 1 says that God created man from the DUST, not through genetic mutations of other animals. Also, Genesis says that God created man and animals in seven days. Evolutionists claim that over a time period of billions of years, through a series of random genetic mutations, a single-celled organism evolved into intelligent, social, creative human beings. You cannot say that humans both evolved from monkeys over billions of years and that humans also were created by God out of the dust in less than a day. These are two very separate beliefs, and both cannot be right. It is illogical to assume that life could have came from dead chemicals or that physical laws could be an accident. The theory of evolution is incorrect. The universe has a creator, God, and he made everything in existence in one week. Everything was created by the Creator. I will be praying for you.